Potentially serious incidental findings on brain and body magnetic resonance imaging of apparently asymptomatic adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectivesTo determine prevalence and types of potentially serious incidental findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in apparently asymptomatic adults, describe factors associated with potentially serious incidental findings, and summarise information on follow-up and final diagnoses.DesignSystematic review and meta-analyses.Data sourcesCitation searches of relevant articles and authors’ files in Medline and Embase (from inception to 25 April 2017).Review methodsEligible studies included prevalence and types of incidental findings detected among apparently asymptomatic adults undergoing MRI of the brain, thorax, abdomen, or brain and body. Data on study population and methods, prevalence and types of incidental findings, and final diagnoses were extracted. Pooled prevalence was estimated by random effects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity by τ2 statistics.Main outcome measuresPrevalence of potentially serious incidental findings on MRI of the brain, thorax, abdomen, and brain and body.ResultsOf 5905 retrieved studies, 32 (0.5%) met the inclusion criteria (n=27 643 participants). Pooled prevalence of potentially serious incidental findings was 3.9% (95% confidence interval 0.4% to 27.1%) on brain and body MRI, 1.4% (1.0% to 2.1%) on brain MRI, 1.3% (0.2% to 8.1%) on thoracic MRI, and 1.9% (0.3% to 12.0%) on abdominal MRI. Pooled prevalence rose after including incidental findings of uncertain potential seriousness (12.8% (3.9% to 34.3%), 1.7% (1.1% to 2.6%), 3.0% (0.8% to 11.3%), and 4.5% (1.5% to 12.9%), respectively). There was generally substantial heterogeneity among included studies. About half the potentially serious incidental findings were suspected malignancies (brain, 0.6% (95% confidence interval 0.4% to 0.9%); thorax, 0.6% (0.1% to 3.1%); abdomen, 1.3% (0.2% to 9.3%); brain and body, 2.3% (0.3% to 15.4%)). There were few informative data on potential sources of between-study variation or factors associated with potentially serious incidental findings. Limited data suggested that relatively few potentially serious incidental findings had serious final diagnoses (48/234, 20.5%).ConclusionsA substantial proportion of apparently asymptomatic adults will have potentially serious incidental findings on MRI, but little is known of their health consequences. Systematic, long term follow-up studies are needed to better inform on these consequences and the implications for policies on feedback of potentially serious incidental findings.Systematic review registrationProspero CRD42016029472.

Propranolol for familial cerebral cavernous malformation (Treat_CCM): study protocol for a randomized controlled pilot trial

“…However, such an estimation strongly depends on the methodology of ascertainment. Autopsy studies indicate the prevalence of CCMs to be between 0.2% and 0.5% of the population, while papers using brain MRI clinical series report a prevalence between 0.39% and 0.9% [4][5][6].…”

The effects of incidental findings from whole-body MRI on the frequency of biopsies and detected malignancies or benign conditions in a general population cohort study

“…Between 50 and 80% of IFs from research MRI are suspicious for malignancy [1,3]. Such findings may enable timely treatment of a disease, offering potential improvement or preservation of quality and length of life [5,6].…”

“…Despite the frequency of these potentially significant findings, information regarding the clinical outcomes of IFs is limited [3]. There exists uncertainty as to which IFs warrant disclosure and further investigation.…”

“…There exists uncertainty as to which IFs warrant disclosure and further investigation. Management guidelines are lacking [3,10,11]. Research participants with disclosed IFs may present to their physicians and invasive diagnostic actions such as biopsies may result to rule out serious pathology.…”

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) for cancer screening in asymptomatic subjects of the general population: review and recommendations

“…A meta-analysis [35] and systematic review [36] have recently summarized the diagnostic yields of WB-MRI in the population screening context, with particular focus on the prevalence of relevant and indeterminate findings. However, there are no evidence-based recommendations on the key issues such as imaging protocols and strategies for classifying and/or managing findings.…”